When
you are sitting in church and the offering plate is passed, do you feel
uncomfortable? Does the social pressure of your neighbors watching impel you to
put in more than you planned? How do you handle the stares of those near you
when you put in nothing?

More
than a century ago, churches in Germany solved this problem. They don’t pass
the plate anymore. Instead, the federal government deducts a payment for your
church on your tax bill. It happens automatically, so you don’t have to think
about it. It is invisible, so your neighbors do not see it. And, it is probably
less than you would put in the offering, no more than 9 percent of your tax
bill -- compared to the tithing expectation of 10 percent of your total income.

The
“church tax” as it is called, goes not just to church operating budgets, but
also to social services provided by the churches for all citizens, such as
kindergartens, old-people’s homes, hospitals and so on.

But
how should the church react when individuals stop paying the tax (it is
voluntary), yet still want services the church provides, such as communion,
baptism, weddings, burials and funerals and other services?

The
bishops of Germany’s Catholic Church decided this would be allowing freeloaders
to mooch off the payments of paid-up members. So they recently issued
instructions requiring parishes to refuse to permit those who do not pay the
church tax to participate in church activities.

The
morality of this move has caused a great deal of debate. On the one hand, many
faithful parishioners feel relieved of carrying the financial burdens of other
people. On the other hand, many believers feel uneasy about restricting access
to “spiritual services” (e.g., divine forgiveness and even entry to heaven) to
people who pay a tax.

The
right of the Catholic Church to issue such a ban was challenged in court by a
retired law professor on the basis that Canon Law determined church membership
according to an individual’s belief, not by their financial link to the church.
The court ruled against him.

The
implication of this ruling is potentially significant, for it establishes a new
standard for church membership in Germany. More importantly, from the viewpoint
of church-state relations, the decision about membership was made by a secular
court, not by a church body.

Not
only did the court’s actions establish jurisdiction over matters of church
membership (i.e., indicating it had the authority to decided membership
questions for the Catholic Church), but its very decision ruled that belief was
not the primary factor in determining membership. The secular act of tax
payment trumped all.

Of
course, the bishops made this decision in light of the financial strains on the
church following the sexual abuse scandals rocking the church and years of
economic downturn. Combined, the two causes have increased the rates of people
withdrawing from the church.

But
the implications go beyond this. They reshape the church to be like a private
club rather than a universal institution. Rather than worrying about the
salvation of all humanity, the church has made it clear that it is focusing on
serving its members. Its “pay for pray” approach makes it more like the Rotary
Club, or the Elks Lodge, or even Sam’s Club, where paying membership dues gives
you rights and services unavailable to non-members.

While
this column has featured Germany’s Catholic Church because it is in the news,
the Protestant churches are just as closely tied to the government. Although
they have not forbidden non-payers access to communion, Protestants have
restricted employment in church-based services, such as hospitals and
kindergartens, to church members only. So now one has to pay the church for the
privilege of working for it. America’s separation of church and state avoids
this set of problems. Good for us.